This case coming on for final hearing before us on 30.6.09 and 8.7.09 in the presence of Mr.A.N.Anandan, Advocate for complainant and Mr. T.Maharajan, Advocate for the opposite party has not turned up and upon perusing the case records and hearing the arguments and the case having stood over to this day for consideration, this Forum passed the following:

ORDER

Complaint under Section 12 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 seeking direction against the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.9075 to the complainant with interest at 24% p.a., to pay Rs.5000 as compensation for mental agony and to pay Rs.2000 as cost of the proceedings.

The averments in the complaint are as follows:

1. During the year 1995, the opposite party came out with a scheme known as “Teakquity Scheme” where under the opposite party undertook a venture of large scale cultivation of teak trees, which it marketed on a Unit basis and also induced its proposed customers into investing in the scheme by assuring them that it was secure long term investment. As per the terms of the scheme, the opposite party had agreed to cultivate Teak Tress in the land which was to be purchased by the customer and the opposite party also guaranteed 1.06 Cubic Meters Per tree after 20 years. The opposite party promised a return of 261.86% on the invested amount after the period of 20 years.

2. The complainant believing the representation of the opposite party decided to become a member of the said scheme and accordingly on 11.3.1996 for one teak wood tree and on 16.7.96 for four teak wood trees, the complainant become a member of the scheme. The complainant has remitted a total sum of Rs.9075 towards the scheme as investment amount for the five teak wood trees at the opposite party’s branch office at Coimbatore. In evidence there of the opposite party issued a three “Teakquity Certificate” bearing No.K20096 dated 11.3.96 and also other certificate No.P4747 and P4748 dated on 16.7.96 in favour of the complainant where under the complainant was certified to be the owner of 5 teak wood trees which was cultivated in Darapalam plantation in Golugondamandal, Narsipatnam Sub Division, Visakkapatnam Dist, Andhra Pradesh and another is old @@@@harvakottai plantation, in @@@@harvakottai Sub Registration Dt. Under the terms and conditions contained in the scheme, the complainant has option to opt out the scheme in which the opposite party had agreed to refund the invested amount.

3. The complainant decided to opt out of the scheme since he is in urgent need of money for meeting medical expenses. Accordingly the complainant sent a letter to the opposite party on 4.6.99 expressing his desire to opt out the scheme and requested to refund the amount paid by him. On receipt of the letter the opposite party sent a reply to the complainant to send the original Teakquity Certificates along with certain other documents and assured the complainant that the process of refund would be done in 2-3 months time. The complainant had also sent all the required documents to the opposite party.

4. However till date the opposite party has not refunded the sum of Rs.9075. Repeated demands made by the complainant, both in person and by way of letters, have met with no response from the opposite party and the opposite party kept on trotting out same excuses for non-payment. The opposite party is liable to pay interest at 24% p.a. on the outstanding amount from the date of investment till date of payment. The complainant has been put to untold mental agony on account of the indifferent and callous attitude of the opposite party and the opposite party is liable to compensate him for both the monetary loss and mental agony suffered by him. The complainant estimates the damages for mental agony at Rs.5000/-. Hence this complaint.

The averments in the counter of opposite party are as follows:

5. The entire transaction between the complainant and the opposite party is one of the contract governed by the Indian Contracts Act and any breach of either party shall be governed by the provisions of Indian Contracts Act and there is no scope for the complainant to invoke the jurisdiction of the Forum under the C.P.Act. The complainant has no locus standi to file the complaint before the Forum. The transaction between the complainant and the opposite party is relating to immovable property and not relating to moveable property or goods so as to attract the provisions of Consumer Protection Act.

6. The complainant has preferred the complaint without any cause of action. From the nature of transaction, as explained supra, there is no charges or fee paid by the complainant for the same. Therefore, there is no deficiency of service by the respondent. As the respondent has not supplied any material to the complainant, there is no question of defect in the material. In other words, in the facts and circumstances stated as hereinabove there is no element of service for hire to be rendered by the respondent to the complainant. Therefore the complaint is a misconceived one and deserved to be dismissed in limine. Non refund of interim return does not amount to deficiency in service as the opposite party is not obliged to do any service for the complainant. Even assuming without admitting that the opposite party is doing any service that service is not done for any fee or charges.

7. The opposite party is operating at Chennai and it is very difficult to go to the Forum in person on the appointed day. Hence the forum may to consider this as our written representation and defer further proceedings of the matter. The company approached the High Court of Chennai or appropriate relief. The Hon’ble High Court of Chennai has stayed all the proceedings and further prohibited any filing of the case subsequent to the said order. Therefore the above matter in abeyance till the disposal of C.A.407 and 408 of 1999 pending before the Hon’ble High Court, Madras and pass such other suitable orders as may deem fit and thus render justice.

8. The complainant and opposite parties have filed Proof Affidavits along with Ex.A1 to A7 was marked on the side of the complainant and Ex.B1 was marked on the side of the opposite party.

The point for consideration is

Whether the opposite party has committed deficiency in service? If so to what relief the complainant is entitled to?

ISSUE 1

9. The case of the complainant is during the year 1995, the opposite party came out with the scheme known as “Teakquity Scheme” where under the opposite party undertook a venture of large scale cultivation of teak trees and induced its proposed customers into investing in the scheme by assuring them that it was secure long term investment. Believing the representation of the opposite party on 11.3.96 the complainant become a member of the said scheme for one teak wood tree and on 16.7.96 for four teak wood trees, the complainant become member of the scheme paid a sum of Rs.9075 towards the scheme as investment amount for 5 teak wood trees.

10. In evidence thereof the three Teakquity certificates issued by the opposite party is marked as Ex.A1 and A2. Since the complainant decided to opt out of the scheme sent a letter to the opposite party on 4.6.99 expressing his desire to opt out the scheme and requested to refund the amount paid by him. But the opposite party has not refunded the sum of Rs.9075. The act and conduct of the opposite party in not refunding the amount even after lapse of more than a year clearly amounts to gross deficiency in service and also unfair trade practice which caused mental agony to the complainant. Hence the opposite party is liable to compensate the complainant for both the monetary loss and mental agony suffered by him.

11. It is well settled law that these types of cases are maintainable before the Consumer Forum and this Forum is having jurisdiction to entertain into the complaint. The another contention raised by the opposite party is that the non refund of the interim return does not amount to any deficiency in service is not correct. Because the complainant has the option to opt out the scheme in which the opposite party has agreed to refund the money. The Company Applications 407 and 408 of 1999 were disposed of by the Hon’ble High Court on 22.8.2008 and as on today there is no stay. Hence we are of the view that the act and conduct of the opposite party in not refunding the amount clearly amounts to gross deficiency in service and also unfair trade practice which is resulted in mental agony to the complainant. Hence the opposite party is liable to pay compensate the complainant.

12. In the result, we direct the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.9,075 to the complainant with interest at the rate of 24% p.a. from the date of investment till the date of payment, directing the opposite party to pay a sum of Rs.5000 towards the compensation for mental agony caused to him and to pay a sum of Rs.1000 as cost within two months from the date of this order failing which the complainant is at liberty to execute this order u/s.25 and 27 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Complaint against STM

I invested amount in sterling Tree Magnum 15 years back. Till now i didn't recieved any intrium. How should i approach to get my returns back.
Please Help me...
satayanarayana
AndhraPradeshnaresh.abk@gmail.com
09440004862

Please help with stm teakquity payment

Hi , I am also a member since 1996 , and have never received a single paise from STM , please help/guide as to how I can get some of the money invested , as we are in 2010 , hope this NEW YEAR brings luck to all my fellow investor at STM TEAKQUITY , as I undestand that none of us got ever paid by Sterling Tree Magnum (India) Ltd.

Complaint against STM

I also invested in STM in 1996. I did not know what to do with the certificate. On seeing the complaints here in this site, I got some hope that our hard earned money might come back some time. Please do let me know what needs to be done for getting the refund..

Sterling tree Magnum - fraud

My father has also invested into this scheme in 1996. He has bought 2 teak trees @ that point of time . Company has not send us back any money and neither they have send interim amount to be in year 2001 & 2007 . Guys join hands and fight against this company as it is our hard earned money.

Stm

I HAD INVESTED Rs 22125 in this tree company and given acertificate no 8532. now no response. i understand consumer court has delivered final orders. can any one pl help me in getting money back from this fraud company.